July 25, 2010 @ 09:34 AM — by Jon Dishler
Most everyone has heard of the four C's of diamonds that are carat, color, cut and clarity (not necessarily in that order). We have found that there are also four C's in LASIK which gives a basis to begin to evaluate LASIK providers and the decision to have this procedure. The first one that comes to mind is COST (this could be for diamonds also but they don't mention it for some reason). The second is COMFORT since nobody or almost nobody wants to experience pain. The third C is Convenience of the visits, the procedure, and lifestyle impact in general. And the final C is the most important one, credibility. You will notice that I did not mention anything about results which are implicit that the reasons people want laser vision correction are to see better, and we have already discussed how with the best technology available today, the results are in general excellent.
June 28, 2010 @ 08:50 PM — by Jon Dishler
Tomorrow, June 29th is the one year anniversary of appearing on the Tom Martino show, and this week we are bringing a patient who had LASIK with Dr. Jon Dishler one year ago. Our guest, Brian, is an avid golfer, and he is going to share how having LASIK last summer improved his game both right away and now a year later. Brian began with 20/100 vision, and had trouble with contacts drying on his eyes. He couldn't see the alarm clock when he woke up, and he had a lot of trouble especially on windy days. Now he can see better than 20/20 which is a common experience of our LASIK patients. He is able to be very competitive at golf and enjoy all the activities that summer offers.
May 18, 2010 @ 05:27 PM — by Jon Dishler
It was early in the 1990's before anyone even thought about LASIK that we were first with another procedure, ALK. In Automated Lamellar Keratoplasty (ALK) we used a microkeratome to make a thin flap on the cornea, and then removed a small amount of corneal tissue to reduce severe nearsightedness (sound familiar?). This procedure was an outgrowth of an even older procedure where the front of the cornea was reshaped using a lathe, that dates back about forty years! This new procedure was a major advancement, and I published on our results with nine other doctors from around the country, many of whom are leaders in their own community in refractive vision corrective surgery. What we learned in these procedures made us realize that although our results were promising, they were inexact and needed the refinement that a laser could offer.
May 09, 2010 @ 09:45 PM — by Jon Dishler
We can talk all day long about our experience, technology, and culture at Dishler Laser, but if patients are not happy with the final result, we have not been successful. Recently we sent out an e-mail survey to a consecutive group of over 100 patients asking about their experience, their results, and their satisfaction with our services. I am happy to report to you that 97% of the respondents were satisfied, very satisfied, or extremely satisfied with their results. Of the few people who were not satisfied, we investigated the reasons and in all but one case it had to do with administrative reasons, not their vision.
We understand that it is impossible to make everyone totally happy, and this survey has shown us what we are doing right, and a few areas that we can further improve. Considering the wide range of people and their vision challenges that we face, this is and extremely gratifying outcome.
April 25, 2010 @ 09:34 PM — by Jon Dishler
While we have had superb results in general with our Zeiss Laser platform for 80% of patients, there are some who have extreme corrections that we have been treating with the Allegretto laser and who have had unexpectedly good results. This opens the door for many who have wanted LASIK but were told that they had vision which was beyond what can be fixed with this method. In general, patients with very strong glasses correction can benefit greatly with the newer laser method called "Optivision."
April 03, 2010 @ 10:01 AM — by Jon Dishler
There has been much discussion about LASIK on this site and others about the technology, the cost, experience, and outcomes. At the end of the day, each person must make a decision about whether vision correction is the right decision for them. While many people try to logically make a decision if LASIK is a good choice, and if this is a good time, what most people ultimately find after having LASIK is that it was one of the best decisions that they ever made. Why? Because it frees them from the constant tether to glasses or contact lenses which were the only alternative. We make many decisions throughout our lives to improve our quality of life, and LASIK is perhaps one of the most important of those decisions.
March 08, 2010 @ 04:19 PM — by Jon Dishler
First there was PRK (photorefractive keratectomy) then there was LASIK, and now you might here about ASA (advanced surface ablation). What is advanced surface ablation, how is it different than PRK, and when is it indicated in vision correction instead of LASIK? The original laser vision correction was PRK on the corneal surface. LASIK eclipsed PRK with rapid visual recovery, minimal discomfort, and no scarring. Now we are coming back to an improved version of PRK called Advanced Surface Ablation or ASA in certain patients. Learn why this might be your best option and how things have changes over the last 20 years.
March 06, 2010 @ 09:59 PM — by Jon Dishler
If you are reading these words, then you must have found them on the internet. Many people are here because of friends or family who decided to see Dr. Dishler for their vision correction by old fashioned "word of mouth". They type in our name or web address directly. Others find themselves here because they saw Dr. Dishler on TV or read about him in Forbes magazine. But many others are reading these words because search engines brought them here. They were referred by two very popular 'women'. One is named Page, the other is Alexa. Actually these of course are not particular women at all, but as you shall see the analogy holds true nonetheless. Welcome to the world of LASIK popularity.
February 25, 2010 @ 03:33 PM — by Jon Dishler
Since LASIK is a high tech sort of medical procedure, then why not wait awhile for it to get even better and less expensive? That is a reasonable question, and one that many people ask themselves and sometimes even ask us during their consultation. If there has never been a better time to have LASIK than today, then why not wait until tomorrow and see if it gets even better? While this many times makes sense when considering other high tech purchases like computers or TV's it is not really necessary in regards to LASIK. Even in computers, one has to balance the wait with what they will be missing during that time. In the case of LASIK we are in a technology that has reached maturity, where the incremental changes are very small compared to the benefits derived. Even more importantly, we have the experience to know how well what we currently using works for a large variety of patients.
February 08, 2010 @ 11:08 AM — by Jon Dishler
Recently I have been investigating cameras from Nikon and when you look at what makes the difference between a $200 Coolpix and a $5200 D3S model, you can learn something important about LASIK. In bright light under ideal circumstances they both take great pictures. Why are these two camera that are 25 times difference in price (and the Coolpix is much easier to carry around) is the reason that professional photographers choose the D3S? It must be more than to look cool carrying around a big impressive looking camera. The answer is that It takes a lot more money and a much bulkier camera to do what the D3 can do as compared to the Coolpix. In a phrase the difference is low light capability. The D3 can take pictures that still look good in very dim light whereas the Coolpix (without a flash) cannot.
In bright light with high contrast targets, both cameras can easily give 20/20 type sharpness but obviously this is not the whole story or NASA would not have decided to lug some D3S cameras into outer space if a smaller camera would work just as well.